W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > August 2004

Re: comment: http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/

From: <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 14:31:39 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200408201831.OAA03016@clue.msid.cme.nist.gov>
To: noy@SMI.Stanford.EDU, rector@cs.man.ac.uk
Cc: tu@SMI.Stanford.EDU, public-swbp-wg@w3.org 


Alan Rector wrote:
>I don't have my language lawyer papers with me so I am not sure if you can 
>have inverse functional data type properties.  If you can't, then the above 
>becomes  even more complicated and you can't quite express all the constraints 
>in OWL.

Alas one cannot have InverseFunctional DatatypeProperties in OWL DL :(.
OWL Ref. almost describes this limitation as a feature which simplifies the 
DL syntax!  Obvious hacks of simply moving the data value to an object and
making that relation 1-to-1 apparently are not comestible to Racer either, 
even though Protege tests indicate the ontology to be DL.

-Evan
Received on Friday, 20 August 2004 18:31:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:17:12 GMT